Rigby would like to know your caliber preference(s) for a Highland Stalker model without iron sights

mgstucson · Sep 10, 2026

Another vote for "None". I wouldn't buy any rifle without iron sights, much less a premium rifle like a Rigby. I would never carry a gun with no irons in a place where DG exists, even if that was not the quarry I was seeking. Really, I don't think I would ever carry a rifle afield without irons sights period. I think it says a lot about the current state of Rigby that they are even asking the question. There are plenty of things that can and do happen to scopes in the field. Even an old guy can still make do with an iron sighted rifle in a pinch, but a no sighted rifle????

If a scope breaks, you will move from being a member of the Rigby Club, to OWNING a Rigby club.

Now if a maker includes irons AND a quality set of premium fill screws in case one wants to remove them, that would be a value added, not a value deleted. This would cost the maker almost nothing, but make a statement about the maker's thoughtfulness toward it's customer. It really is the little things that separate the good ones from the great ones.

I have often looked at the quality of iron sights a company puts on a rifle as a statement about the time and care that maker puts into the little details. Cheap irons, or poorly done irons, will tell you a lot about the little details you can't see in the rifle build. Of course Rigby has a stellar reputation for quality, but if they make a rifle with no iron sights, it makes one wonder what other corners are starting to be cut. I would see this as a small step in a slide toward mediocrity for Rigby, sort of like when Winchester started making the model 70 a push feed. I would be sad to see it.

You could offer "No Sights" as a custom option on any rifle for some hunter that really despises them.

tarbe · Sep 10, 2026

rblum said:
I don’t quite understand the market segment that Rigby is aiming at, but I am guessing African Plains Game and US game (w exception of bison and grizzly. If that is the case, .308 Win works the best for me, followed by 30-06. I have a bunch of rifles but gravitate toward the .308 when hunting.
ALL CALIBERS ARE COMPROMISES. Positive and negative comments can be made for any of them. So there is no ‘’One best’’ answer. The problem for Rigby will be to sell the darn things. This is a different question than voting for your favorite cartridge. Inventory on the shelf is not revenue. Where can they find the best sales point? The answer may not be .308 or 30-06 as many people already own those calibers and may not be inclined to purchase yet another rifle of the same caliber.
The current business model is to hype the heck out of a new cartridge by paying or sponsoring hunts in Africa for hunting magazine authors in that new caliber. In my view I am much less likely to purchase a rifle if I already have one of that same caliber in my safe. That is a problem for Rigby as the hunting rifle market is pretty saturated. From a rifle sales perspective, perhaps the best course of action would be to invent yet another .30 caliber type cartridge, say ‘’295 Rigby Magnum’’ or some such and answer the question by going in that direction.

Or just do a 300 H&H. The classic British 30 caliber.

Jay Kelley · Sep 10, 2026

I can't afford a Rigby unless I pick the right six numbers on Saturday...but if I could I wouldn't buy one without iron sights - all of my rifles have iron sights and only a couple have optics.

Desperatezulu · Sep 10, 2026

IvW said:
300 H&H

Second this - logically a 'classic' scoped rifle lends itself to flatter shooting PG calibres - my feeling is a 300 mag is the way to go. 300 WM is too common - H&H is an English-developed calibre so a good match. The 308 NOrma Mag would also be a nice option but being a reload-only proposition, it may not appeal to enough of Rigby's target market.

Ricardo Sanchez-Riera · Sep 10, 2026

I vote for the old and always rebatible 30.06!!

Ricardo Sanchez-Riera · Sep 10, 2026

Reliable!! Not rebatible ( thanks, cell!)

.30 Hembrook · Sep 10, 2026

I’m curious why the assumption is that Rigby is offering the rifle without sights as a “cost savings measure”.

Who says it’s about cost?

I can comfortably assert that 99% of scoped rifles with fitted with iron sights are used exclusively with the scope. That is why many manufacturers offer rifles that are scope only, no irons needed.

Let’s be realistic about iron sights. I personally wanted to use the irons on my Savage 99 in .303 Savage in Africa. After a couple range sessions with both the rear leaf and a tang peep, I realized even in good light conditions I was shooting minute-of-basketball with irons.

Keep in mind I shoot High-Power National Match with M1s and AR-15NMs using irons out to 600 yards. The 10 ring is 7 inches at 200 and I hit it pretty consistently. I could not do the same with the .303.

So I mounted a 1960 vintage Weaver K2.5 scope on it and my groups dropped to less than 2” at 100 yards. Good enough for a steenbock at 115 yards in thick brush.

I have stalked in the highlands and typically it was with a Sako85, with a moderator and a Swarovski 6 power scope. 5 stags at ranges from 150-250 yards were the result.

I also have a Haenel 7x65 single shot with irons and a scope. I zeroed the irons, but have never hunted with them.

So I guess I am confused by folks who:
A) advocate for iron sights
B) want a .300WM/.338WM/7mmPRC for the “extra range”

Who shoots that far that you need a “super magnum” with Irons?

I have been hunting since the 1980s, all over the world, with scopes from Tasco to Schmidt & Bender. I’ve seen scopes go bad. I have not had to pull a scope off and then hunt with irons.

So my summary is I don’t see why the hoopla is about not including irons on a rifle unlikely to ever need them.

Taj · Sep 10, 2026

The .275 Rigby is a very good cartridge but I also still love (don't laugh, please) the .30-06. The 06 is a very effective plains game cartridge despite it's age, with a large variety of quality bullets and weights available. I have taken game all over the planet with that caliber and it has always been close to my heart. I have several Winchester Pre64 model 70's in that caliber. I did however, recently finished building a .275 Rigby and it is desperately wanting a trip to Africa.

Dianas Favorite · Sep 10, 2026

In my honest and humble oppinion the .275 Rigby (7×57mm Mauser) is perfectly suited for european and especially britischen Stags. The game is lightbodied and the trajectory is flat allowing the game to be shot from a distance. If it would be for PG in Africa, then it must be a 300WM, my most trusted companion in Africa (after my .416 Rigby).

JPbowhunter · Sep 10, 2026

.30 Hembrook said:
I’m curious why the assumption is that Rigby is offering the rifle without sights as a “cost savings measure”.

Who says it’s about cost?

I can comfortably assert that 99% of scoped rifles with fitted with iron sights are used exclusively with the scope. That is why many manufacturers offer rifles that are scope only, no irons needed.

Let’s be realistic about iron sights. I personally wanted to use the irons on my Savage 99 in .303 Savage in Africa. After a couple range sessions with both the rear leaf and a tang peep, I realized even in good light conditions I was shooting minute-of-basketball with irons.

Keep in mind I shoot High-Power National Match with M1s and AR-15NMs using irons out to 600 yards. The 10 ring is 7 inches at 200 and I hit it pretty consistently. I could not do the same with the .303.

So I mounted a 1960 vintage Weaver K2.5 scope on it and my groups dropped to less than 2” at 100 yards. Good enough for a steenbock at 115 yards in thick brush.

I have stalked in the highlands and typically it was with a Sako85, with a moderator and a Swarovski 6 power scope. 5 stags at ranges from 150-250 yards were the result.

I also have a Haenel 7x65 single shot with irons and a scope. I zeroed the irons, but have never hunted with them.

So I guess I am confused by folks who:
A) advocate for iron sights
B) want a .300WM/.338WM/7mmPRC for the “extra range”

Who shoots that far that you need a “super magnum” with Irons?

I have been hunting since the 1980s, all over the world, with scopes from Tasco to Schmidt & Bender. I’ve seen scopes go bad. I have not had to pull a scope off and then hunt with irons.

So my summary is I don’t see why the hoopla is about not including irons on a rifle unlikely to ever need them.

I would challenge your assumption of 99%, particularly when it comes to Rigby owners. I’ve seen quite a few used with irons.

With respect, your post is a long winded way of saying you prefer scopes for hunting - and that’s ok.

I prefer irons, in fact I’ve yet to shoot anything with my Rigby using scope.

As for groupings I’m not a great shot, I don’t shoot comp and I don’t stress on size of groups like some do. But with my 303 (not a Rigby) I’ll shoot a little over 2” at a 100m on a good day and I will and have comfortably shot game to 160m with irons.

If someone doesn’t want to use the irons just put a scope on and don’t take it off. Rigby is a niche product and to offer guns without irons is to offer a niche product within a niche product. And let’s face it, most folks that are shooting non iron sighted rifles are shooting stainless synthetic firearms in the $1-3k range and have never heard of rigby much less have an appreciation for the brand or history. I’ve no doubt some will buy a Rigby in this configuration maybe but how many are going to spend 10-20 times what they are currently spending on a rifle? I’d wager very few.

.30 Hembrook · Sep 10, 2026

Apologies if someone thinks I am long winded.

Let me ask this:

Rigby is asking about a HIGHLAND STALKER. What is that rifle for?

Stalking
In the Highlands

Roebuck
Red deer
Muntjac

So all the responses about needing iron sights for dangerous game in Africa seem to miss the entire point about what Rigby is asking of its potential customers. There is no dangerous game in Scotland (except Vorpal Bunnies).

I realize this is an Africa Hunting board.

African hunting is not/not the use of a highland stalker.

So if I were to go back to stalk in the Highlands, a fine Rigby in .275 with a good medium power scope (4 or 6x fixed, or a 2.5-8 Zeiss) would be just right.

FOR ROEBUCK OR STAGS in the HIGHLANDS.

If the scope breaks, the. I go to the Stalker and borrow his.

Mother Plucker · Sep 10, 2026

RIGBY said:
Rigby is considering developing and offering a Highland Stalker model without iron sights and would greatly appreciate the opinion of the community on what calibers it would prefer in such a model. Thank you in advance for your contribution!

Sad to see just these old cartridges. Rugby can be a classic rifle with modern cartridge choices. 6 Creed, 6.5 PRC, even 6 ARC and 22 ARC are amazing cartridges for multiple animals, proven to take everything up to moose.

R eight · Sep 10, 2026

Ontario Hunter said:
Okay, I have the solution. Name this new model the Rigby "Grand Slam Stalker." Anyone hunting the Grand Slam of North American or world sheep trophies will be using a long range scoped rifle and typically in a newer caliber with no iron sights. And anyone hunting those slams would be Rigby class material. It's a perfect fit! Caliber would be 300 Win. You're welcome Rigby. Please don't send me a new rifle. That would mean I'd have to stop hunting with the Springfield 03A3 Dad built for me ... and that's not happening. But I'm sure there's something in your shop I'd like. PM me for a mailing address.

Having had 2 tags for sheep, and having only shot one, I wouldn’t even consider taking a rifle that didn’t possess back up sights fitted.

Let’s just say that it costs a significant amount of money to chase sheep. Just getting a tag and then even seeing a legal ram is a challenge. Plus when you consider the terrain in which you hunt, with a reasonable chance of having a fall and damaging a rifle/ sighting system. Why limit yourself to just one option.

For those reasons I chose a synthetic stocked rifle, a quality scope in QD mounts, with a backup red dot and iron sights too… just to be sure. The Aimpoint lived in the tent. But it was there if needed.

Now, I do own a HS in ‘06 and I would love to hunt sheep with her. If I were a billionaire I would. But as a bum that hunts I wanted a near bulletproof outfit.

Hence the R8 Professional in 30/06.

Longfeather1 · Sep 10, 2026

As for caliber I would like to see the return of one of the classics; 257 Roberts / 25.06 / 257 WBY (gasp) or perhaps something like the 264 Win Mag.

As for open sights, definitely

Dantes Hurtado · Sep 10, 2026

What is the reason for a rifle with no iron sights, especially from a premium gunmaker like Rigby? Cannot be cost reduction. Functionality? No. So there is no rationale, except for a purely aesthetic North American feel. Rigby should forget the idea.

R eight · Sep 10, 2026

.30 Hembrook said:
Apologies if someone thinks I am long winded.

Let me ask this:

Rigby is asking about a HIGHLAND STALKER. What is that rifle for?

Stalking
In the Highlands

Roebuck
Red deer
Muntjac

So all the responses about needing iron sights for dangerous game in Africa seem to miss the entire point about what Rigby is asking of its potential customers. There is no dangerous game in Scotland (except Vorpal Bunnies).

I realize this is an Africa Hunting board.

African hunting is not/not the use of a highland stalker.

So if I were to go back to stalk in the Highlands, a fine Rigby in .275 with a good medium power scope (4 or 6x fixed, or a 2.5-8 Zeiss) would be just right.

FOR ROEBUCK OR STAGS in the HIGHLANDS.

If the scope breaks, the. I go to the Stalker and borrow his.

Sometimes it can be a long way to the shop, or back to the tent, if you want a sausage roll (or a new scope)

lilceasar · Sep 10, 2026

Without open sights this rifle would not be a Stalker rifle. This like a Winchester 1895 with a scope. The caliber I would prefer would be a 300 H&H a true African caliber. Why wouldn’t you thread the rifle and leave it up to owner. Reproductions of many older rifles are this way and they retain the proper look.

Serge · Sep 10, 2026

For me Rigby is associated with dangerous game, so 9.3 - 62

woodsrunner · Sep 10, 2026

EfRed said:
When in doubt, go .30-06. But - If I buy a Rigby, I want iron sights. Part of the job of a stalker is to walk, a lot. Weight matters. Ditch the scope. Do your job - stalk. That means get as close as you need to for irons to do the job!

Amen.

meigsbucks · Sep 10, 2026

A Rigby HS isn’t in my future unless I scrap plans for a hunt and put the $$$ toward a rifle.. However, I have handled a HS. I’m surprised the salesman didn’t yank it out of my hands for fear I’d drool on it.
To me a HS isn’t a HS without irons. That said, except for my DG rifles, a vast majority of my rifles wear only scopes. If the sightless Rigby would wear a different moniker than a HS, I think it’s a good option. Maybe Plains Hunter?
As far as chambering, I voted for .30/06 and .338 Win mag. The ‘06 because not only is it a classic, but versatile. The .338 because it just hammers game.

Rigby would like to know your caliber preference(s) for a Highland Stalker model without iron sights

What caliber(s) would you like to see offered in a Rigby Highland Stalker without iron sights?

.275 Rigby

.30-06

.308

8x57

9.3-62

7mm Rm Mag

.300 Win Mag

.338 Win Mag

mgstucson

tarbe

Jay Kelley

Desperatezulu

Ricardo Sanchez-Riera

Ricardo Sanchez-Riera

.30 Hembrook

Taj

Dianas Favorite

JPbowhunter

.30 Hembrook

Mother Plucker

R eight

Longfeather1

Dantes Hurtado

R eight

Attachments

lilceasar

Serge

woodsrunner

meigsbucks

Members online

Forum statistics

Proudly sponsored by

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Share this page